Update companies

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations include idempotentHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the update action and id requirement. It does not clarify partial vs. full field replacement, response format, or error behavior, which is notable for a mutation tool without readOnly/destructive hints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and the key requirement. There is no redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers core requirements (what and the required id) for a simple batch update, but lacks details about update semantics and response behavior. With no output schema and minimal schema info, more context would improve completeness, yet the description is minimally viable.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has zero description coverage for the 'companies' parameter. The description compensates by stating each object must include 'id', which is essential, but it does not explain other accepted fields or the object structure, leaving reliance on the vague 'Company object per Kommo API'.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'Update' and resource 'companies', and explicitly notes 'one or more' to indicate batch capability. This distinguishes it from kommo_companies_update_one, making the tool's purpose clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for batch updates by saying 'one or more' and provides a prerequisite ('Each object must include id'). However, it does not explicitly contrast with the single-update tool or state when to use one over the other.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.